Maravi

Tension between the govt and the church

Tension between the govt and the church
By Editor
Wed 13 Jan. 2010, 04:00 CAT

Sam Mulafulafu, the executive director of Caritas Zambia, says there will be growing tension between the state and the church in 2010.

Is Mulafulafu right in his observation? We think he is because the issues that usually make the church speak out are not being addressed by those in government, if anything they are getting worse by the day. This being the case, the church is going to increasingly speak out on these issues because the joys and hopes, the sorrows and anxieties of the women and men of our time, especially of those who are poor or afflicted in any way, are the joys and hopes, the sorrows and anxieties of the followers of Jesus Christ, of the church itself.

But why should the church be a target of government attacks when it is doing good for the people; why should the church’s genuinely good intentions be sneered at by those in government; why should there appear to be a permanent quest on their part to bring down the church or ridicule it and accuse it of all sorts of crimes, including genocide? It is baffling.

Our own and only explanation is that genuine goodness is threatening to those at the opposite end of the moral or ethical spectrum.

Truly, the same usual accusations or arguments will be raised over and over again. The church will be told to concentrate on preaching the Word of God instead of engaging in politics; the church will be told to move away from politics or if it wants to join politics, it should do so openly. It will be accused of this and that endlessly. And usually in this country, the target church is the Catholic Church because of its social teachings that place it at the centre of the day-to-day plight of our people.

But there is no need to pretend that the church has no role to play in the political realm. And probably, we should define what we mean by politics. By politics, we mean all activities relating to governing, guiding or building civil society. Given this definition, what can we say to be the role of the church in politics? We think, firstly, that the church needs to recognise that it does have a role to play in the political realm and there is no need to be shy or apologetic about this. We make this point because many Christians struggle with the church’s involvement in the social, political and economic issues.

Yet scripture and history clearly support the church’s place in these concerns. Daniel becomes a leader in Babylon, Amos and other prophets speak into political and social matters in Israel, Judah and the surrounding nations. Both John the Baptist and Jesus refer to the political concerns of their day. In both the Old and New testaments, God’s representatives spoke out against abuse of political power and sought just use of power. This surely is what being “salt and light” means. Hence, participation in politics does not detract from spirituality; in fact, a spirituality that is unrelated to politics is questionable.

Secondly, we are convinced that the key role the church plays in politics is through its prophetic ministry. Prophetic here means speaking into policy, structure, or issues in the name of God and Christ, on behalf of humanity in general or of a community in particular. Anglican Bishop Desmond Tutu was a classical example of this, following, we believe, the prophetic pattern in the Old Testament. This is different from the prophetic word that is current – different in emphasis, not better or worse. The church has a set of moral norms and it has illustrations in scripture and in history of how these norms have been used.

The prophetic role is seen in the application of relevant moral norms to the current political concerns of the day. Hence, the church needs to continue engaging with the government on justice, corruption, leadership, economic performance, housing, education, healthcare and whatever else is morally important. Further, the church needs to be saying “yes” as well as “no” to government promises and policies. By “no” we mean to clearly oppose wrongdoing, corruption, or anything else deemed unedifying and not benefiting society. “Yes” supports commitment to fulfilling promises made to making real efforts to improve healthcare, to making education truly a prime target for development. The government should look again at how it spends money in areas considered priorities.

It should be reasonably clear that the church’s role in politics is an ethical one. We are not concerned here with party politics which is often partisan, though we concede that individual Christians belonging to parties of their choice will apply ethics within the framework of their party’s policies. We consider ethics as an expression of God’s compassion for humanity: God’s desire for the best for creation. It also reflects the “image of God” in humanity. If all humanity is made in the image of God in some way or other, then humans are surely to seek the best for each other. Public leaders, then, are to work for the betterment of their communities. Such concern in Zambia is rare today or has it ever been really evident? The reason is due to self-centredness.

And one cannot formulate policy or structure society without having the checks and balances to offset the persuasive and corrupting elements of selfishness. Hence, law is necessary; the Constitution is critical; codes of conduct become imperative.

However, laws, codes of conduct, constitutions – including the Bible, cannot guarantee transformation of even minimal change. There has to be a will to want to act. And this relates to hope. For people to want change, motivation is needed. Hence, those ethicists that emphasise “responsibility” stress the value of integrity now, for this influences the future. So, it may be that some people who were part of the campaigns to see Zambia become a true democracy are now disappointed because they sense no hope – or very little, for the future. This hopelessness is rooted in disillusionment in the present. For this despair to change, leaders, including political leaders, have to voluntarily impose upon themselves limits and restrictions, sacrifice more and exercise self-denial as visible examples of their commitment to the future. The future can be good when, among other things, one is secure in job, home and bank balance. The future is dark and dreary if one is poor, homeless, jobless or insecure and frightened.

Principled leaders guide the nation into responsible action. And it is responsible action that honours principle, enabling others to understand and appreciate it. Thus, for example: the principle of economic security generates job creation. But if education is inadequate, economic security is impacted negatively. Hence, a vicious cycle is created with little or nothing done to produce meaningful life in the land.

And what is the role of the church in all this? The church has to speak and act, the church has to engage the government on moral terms, not on expediency or seeming interference. Christians in the political arena have to commit themselves to honesty and integrity in all areas of their lives to show by example that following Jesus works.

The church’s role in politics is to be there visibly in the context of political policy formulation. The church has to be prophetic, speaking for God. The church has to herald the ethical values that enrich the nation. The church has to be bold and forthright, constructive and innovative. The church has to be “salt and light” in what is so often a corrupt environment, to bring light and health.

For all these reasons, the church should not be afraid or be deterred by political attacks from those in government. It should not be scared of being accused of this and that, of being called all sorts of names. We say this because the simple lesson of all religions is that although evil, greed and vanity may be on the rampage temporarily, the good must win the laurels in the end. We therefore need religious institutions to continue to be the conscience of society, a moral custodian and a fearless champion of the interests of the weak and downtrodden. Religion is a great force and it can help one have command of one’s own morality, one’s own behaviour and one’s own attitude.

Labels: RELIGION

posted by MrK @ 6:59 AM